All Content Copyright S & F Media LLC

Safety Tips

October 07, 2011

If you are a woman or if you are someone who has a loved one who is a woman - mother, sister, wife, daughter, grandmother, friend, aunt, cousin, or co-worker (to name a few of the roles women might play in your life), make sure that you or your loved one is not only aware of Breast Cancer Awareness Month; but also knows what to do about it.

My Story: I am 41 years old and I have been getting mammograms since I was 35 because of family history and self exams. I am fine, but I have a spot that the doctors watch. The specialist said that they can never say with absolute certainty that you do not have breast cancer, they can only confirm if you do. He also said that in most cases, breast cancer is slow growing. I took this with a grain of salt since I know several women who discovered their breast cancer during a self exam only a month after their routine mammogram; so the take away is that you have to be proactive with breast cancer.

Last year, when I did see the breast specialist, I was fortunate in that he took the time to talk to me for a long time (and he had a pleasant Irish accent to boot). He addressed my concerns and answered my questions. Then he expressed his frustration, because he said that for the people who are doing routine self exams, see a doctor for an annual check up, and get mammograms, there is a high likelihood that any breast cancer will be found in time for effective treatment. The breast specialist told me that he was frustrated, he said, because there is a whole population of women who aren't getting checked and this is where the focus of the awareness needs to be.

So, TAKE SOME ACTION: If you are one of those women, please go for a checkup; or if you have a woman in your life who you care about, ask her if she is actually doing something on a routine basis to check to make sure that they are healthy. Breast Cancer Awareness Month gives you the perfect opportunity to address this subject.

Here are some online links and resources to get you started to becoming more aware during this Breast Cancer Awareness Month:

July 29, 2011

Rolling Back the Nanny State

One red-light camera at a time

Jonathan V. Last

August 1, 2011, Vol. 16, No. 43

Last March the city council in San Bernardino voted 5-0 to kill their red-light camera system. Since the cameras were installed in 2005, the program had brought them little but grief. In 2008, the city was caught shortening the timing of yellow lights in order to gin up more citations. Later that year a California appellate court ruled that the city’s contract with the red-light camera service American Traffic Solutions (ATS) was in violation of state law. And in 2010, a county court ruled that images from red-light cameras were inadmissible hearsay. The cameras were such a debacle for San Bernardino that in the end the city paid ATS $110,000 to get out of a contract that would have kept the cameras in place until 2014.

It sounds like an extraordinary story: a city, in the middle of a recession, paying a vendor to cancel a contract that is supposed to produce revenue. But it turns out that San Bernardino isn’t extraordinary at all. Across California and the rest of the country, cities and towns are dismantling their red-light camera regimes. And it’s this larger story that’s remarkable, because it shows that even at this late date, the people can, from time to time, still hold their governments to account.

Like many cultural plagues, the red-light camera originated in Europe. Invented by a Dutch race-car driver, Maurice Gatsonides, red-light cameras were installed by European municipalities throughout the 1980s to ticket drivers without the necessity of using actual police. In 1993 the sickness crossed the Atlantic, and New York City permanently installed cameras of its own.

The idea behind the red-light camera is simple: Place the device in an intersection, and when a car passes through after the light has turned from amber to red, it snaps away—taking photos of the car’s position, the driver’s side window, and the license plate. In practice, the system is only slightly more complicated because the local police do not operate the cameras themselves. Instead, the city contracts with one of several big corporations (such as American Traffic Solutions, based in Arizona, or Redflex, an Australian firm) who do the work for them. The company installs, maintains, and monitors the cameras. When they catch someone running a red light, they electronically send the file to the local police department for a pro forma sign off, and then they mail out the ticket themselves. The company typically collects the fine and returns some share of the money to the municipality. It’s a little like privateering.

And like privateering, red-light cameras are a pretty good business. American governments initially justified them under the rubric of public safety—the cameras were supposed to make intersections safer and protect, bless their little hearts, The Children. But the fig leaf of safety frittered away as study after study showed that the cameras made little difference and in some cases actually made intersections less safe. Drivers, knowing cameras were watching, tended to jam on their brakes suddenly at yellow lights, causing accidents. Further research showed that there was a way to make intersections safer: Simply lengthen the duration of amber lights, allowing drivers more time to make the critical decision to stop or go.

But there’s no money in longer yellow lights. And it turned out that there was lots of it—piles and piles, really—in red-light cameras. In Washington, D.C., red-light cameras raised $15.6 million in their first 30 months of operation. In one year—2009—Chicago made $64 million from them. It’s such big business that in 2001, Lockheed Martin sold their red-light camera division to another company, Affiliated Computer Services, for $800 million.

Which is why, throughout the ’90s, red-light cameras sprouted across the American landscape. A company would come to town and pitch the local pols with the kind of deal that sold itself. “Just let us set up the cameras,” they’d say, “and we’ll give you a stream of never-ending revenue from a source that has no constituency. All you have to do is take credit for saving lives.” Five hundred thirty-nine cities in 25 states signed up.

For a while, it looked as though the red menace might spread, slowly and irresistibly, to every intersection in America. After all, this is the mode of public life to which we’ve become accustomed: Officials, some elected, some not, decide to add little annoyances to our daily lives—more regulations for light bulbs, toilets, seatbelts, speed bumps—that prove irrevocable. Oh sure, on the big-ticket items—war, abortion, taxes, spending—elections have consequences. But when it comes to the little things, modern government has become a ratchet that only turns one way.

Yet the spectacle of government handing law enforcement duties to private companies with a monetary incentive to write as many citations as possible was a bridge too far. And city by city, the cameras have been pushed back.

Amazingly enough, in some cases the courts actually helped. In California they’ve made life difficult for the camera companies with decisions like the ones in San Bernardino. In Ohio a federal appeals court ruled that Cleveland’s camera law was so poorly crafted that since it said car “owners” could be ticketed, people who lease their vehicles were exempt. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that Minneapolis’s entire red-light camera program was illegal and forced the city to refund the $2.6 million it had collected.

In some cities, the government bureaucracy has pushed back, too. In Los Angeles last June, the Police Commission voted unanimously to drop its contract with ATS and get rid of cameras altogether. Despite the fact that L.A.’s red-light tickets are $476 a pop, and that the program has written $80 million worth of citations since 2004, the city has found a way to lose money on the deal. Once the camera company takes its fat cut, the residual dollars aren’t enough to cover the costs of the seven police officers who monitor the program and make the pro forma signoffs.

But the real muscle has come from voters. Petitions have put cameras on the ballot in local elections across the country, and whenever voters are given a choice on the matter, they say “no.” In Houston, a pair of lawyers fought city hall to get a charter amendment (Proposition 3) on the ballot. The city’s camera company, ATS, spent $1.7 million in advertising during the race. The cameras lost. In Anaheim, an amendment banning cameras won 73 percent. In Sulphur, Louisiana, an anti-camera measure took 86 percent. From Maryland to Ohio to Arizona to Illinois, whenever voters get to pull the lever, the cameras get run out of town.

Which is why many towns (and the camera companies) have tried to keep the matter out of voters’ hands. In its 2010 annual report, Redflex noted that, while citizens have attempted to introduce ballot measures on cameras in many localities, the company was “actively implementing measures to defend against them” so as to “protect and improve our interests” in these “markets.” That’s not just bare-knuckled Redflex tactics, it’s the industry standard. In Mukilteo, Washington, for instance, ATS asked a court to issue an emergency injunction preventing a proposed camera ban from appearing on the town’s ballot. The court declined; the anti-camera measure won, 70 to 30.

Part of the reason people hate cameras is that the alliance of business and government tends to bring out the worst in both. In 2009, Danny Park was driving through Santa Ana when a camera operated by Redflex tagged him for running a light. He fought the $436 ticket on the grounds that the city had not provided a 30-day warning period for the camera, which California state law requires at every intersection where a camera is operational. Park took his case all the way to the appellate division of the Superior Court in Orange County. And he won. The decision was scheduled for publication when the city of Santa Ana took the extremely unusual step of petitioning the state Supreme Court to “depublish” the decision. Why? It wouldn’t change the verdict in the Park case, but an unpublished decision would mean that other California drivers wouldn’t be able to use the case as precedent. Instead, they’d have to re-create Park’s entire argument from scratch—and likely work their way up the appeals chain, since the trial courts almost always find for the state in such cases—if they wanted to fight illegally manufactured tickets. (The High Court denied the request.)

When they’re not trying to game the legal system, the camera industry runs creepy Astroturf campaigns proclaiming its beneficence. Whenever cameras are in danger of going on ballots, a website appears. In Mukilteo it was KeepMukilteoSafe.com. The sites purport to be grassroots hubs for pro-camera voters, but they’re prefab constructs without a whit of actual public support behind them. At least 18 of them appeared across the country recently, nearly identical in form and content. All of the sites were registered by a company called Advarion, which provides web services to ATS.

Already prone to suspect the worst about camera companies and local governments, a ring of anti-camera activist websites went to work ferreting out other bits of Astroturf. (They followed in the footsteps of anti-camera activist Richard Diamond’s invaluable TheNewspaper.com.) They noticed that a particular line in favor of cameras kept appearing in the comments sections of stories about camera bans: “Seriously, you don’t hear non-smokers complain about cigarette taxes so why should we believe these whiners are anything but reckless drivers who don’t want to get caught?” The exact same wording and punctuation appears on dozens of websites, from the Washington Post to the Newark Star-Ledger. Other camera company fronts are slightly less bald-faced. The “National Coalition for Safer Roads,” for instance, is a nonprofit dedicated to showing that red-light cameras save lives. It’s actually staffed and run by a former Bush appointee. The organization is also, as the website demurely puts it, “supported by” ATS.

There’s nothing new or shocking about an industry lobbying for itself, standing up fake grassroots support, and spending money to influence elections. But the fact that the camera companies behave like any other rent-seeking business tells you everything you need to know about them. Except that in this case, the rent they’re seeking doesn’t come from private-sector competitors. It comes from you.

And like other rent-seekers, the camera industry doesn’t stoically accept the strictures of law and elections. It fights back. In 2009, voters in College Station, Texas, killed the town’s camera program. A week later, an organization called “Keep College Station Safe” sued the city, claiming that the petition leading to the referendum was invalid. “Keep College Station Safe” is a political action committee with $67,100 in total funding: $30,000 from ATS, $5,000 from an ATS consultant, $8,000 from a contractor who works for ATS, $5,000 from an ATS subcontractor, and $16,600 from a company that prints the tickets for ATS.

Voters in College Station then ran up against another obstacle: When “Keep College Station Safe” sued College Station, the city government—which was pro-camera—was eager to roll over and lose the case. It was only after citizen pressure forced the city to hire outside counsel that the lawsuit was defeated and the cameras came down.

Houston has the same problem. After voters approved a measure to get rid of cameras earlier this year, ATS filed suit on similar grounds. In the case of Proposition 3, they maintained that the city could only cancel the program via a “referendum,” but that the vote was put on the ballot as a “charter amendment.” In this case, ATS won. The judge told the city to turn the cameras back on. And it wasn’t at all clear that Houston’s politicians were unhappy to lose in court—the mayor and her city attorney are both camera supporters who didn’t even feign reluctance when they started the cameras running again. Only this time, they no longer pointed to safety as a reason for the cameras. Now the mayor said that she had to keep the cameras running because ATS was holding the city hostage. “Realizing that we have already laid off nearly 750 city employees through a very difficult budget process,” she said, “I can’t in good conscience allow millions of dollars in exposure to ATS under this contract.”

If anything, the case of Houston shows how remarkable it is that the public has made any progress at all against red-light cameras. Because thegovernment is usually more foe than friend. For example, earlier this summer the California assembly took up a bill that would allow cities to reduce posted speeds in certain areas by 5 mph. The reason: cameras. In many intersections, a lower posted speed limit allows traffic lights to have shorter yellow-light intervals. And shorter amber times mean, well, yes, more accidents. But more camera citations, too.

Such are the minutiae of the menace cameras pose to the American system of governance: tenths-of-a-second on yellow-light times and the legal distinction between referendums and charter amendments.

None of it—not shorter yellows or the cameras or the $400 tickets—represents a grand, existential threat to the Republic. But it’s a threat all the same. A threat to the idea that government should be a tool of the people. Not a ratchet.

July 17, 2011

Following an accident or injury it is very important to preserve evidence. Most people who were just in an accident or slip and fall are not thinking about preserving evidence, but they should be. Here are some useful tips for preserving evidence.

AUTO ACCIDENT

1. Take Pictures - most people have a camera phone or digital camera with them. Take pictures of the accident scene, location of the vehicles, damage to cars.

2. Get witness names - many times there are witnesses to auto accidents, but most people dont get their full name, address, and phone number. Carry a pen and paper with you at all times in the car, and always remember to get the witness names.

3. Obtain a repair estimate for automobile damage, and do not sell, dispose or trade in your car until you have taken pictures of the damage, and obtained atleast two repair estimates.

4. Get the other drivers full information, such as drivers license, current address and phone, insurance information, auto tag number, and make model and year of their car. Dont wait for the police or rely on them to gather this information for you. Also dont let the other driver refuse to give you this information, it is the law in Florida that drivers must exchange this information after an accident.

5. Go to the hospital emergency room if you feel that you have been injured in the accident. Then follow up with your physician or chiropractor. In order to document and preserve information about your injuries, you will need to have medical documentation, which may include xrays, MRI scans, CT scans, and physicial examination by a doctor.

SLIP AND FALL

1. Use your camer phone or digital camera to take pictures of the location of your slip and fall, noting water or other substances on the floor, or other dangerous conditions. Businesses and premesis owners may later deny that a dangerous condition existed, and a picture tells a thousand words.

2. Insist on being examined by emergency personnel and call 911, do not try to care for your own injuries or allow employees of the business or premesis attempt to treat you with cold packs, aspirin or pain relievers.

3. Insist that the business owner or premises owner take a written report of the incident and provide you with a copy.

4. Get the names, address, and phone numbers of any witnesses to your slip and fall

5. Get the names, address, and phone number of employees or managers at the business or premises.

6. Preserve your shoes, put your shoes in a zip lock bag and do not wear them again, they may be evidence in the case.

7. Look for security cameras in the vicinity of your fall and ask emplyoees for a copy of the security tape, then follow up with a letter to the manager of the business instructing them to preserve any and all security tapes as possible evidence in a court case.

For more information or for a free consultation, contact Scott and Fenderson, PLLC Injury and Family Law Attorneys, by calling 727-321-0099 or view our web site http://www.scottandfenderson.com

May 23, 2011

1. Walk all the way around and look behind a vehicle prior to moving it.

2. Know where your kids are before moving your vehicle. Make sure another adult is properly supervising children so they do not get into the path of a moving vehicle.

3. To help the driver detect an object or person behind a vehicle, consider installing devices such as rear sensors, cameras, special mirrors or lenses. There are many options available. Check out www.kidsandcars.org and click on the technology page for more information.

4. Teach children that parked vehicles might move. Let them know that even thought they can see the vehicle, the driver might not see them.

5. Trim the landscaping around your driveway to ensure you can see your children.

6. Hold a child's hand when leaving a vehicle.

7. Teach your children to NEVER play in, around or behind any vehicle.

8. Set the emergency brake every time you park.

9. If you drive an SUV, minivan or truck, be aware that these vehicles have larger blind zones, making it difficult or impossible for the driver to see children behind or directly in front of a vehicle.

10. Be more even more cautious during high risk times: More children are injured or killed during busy times, schedule changes, family gatherings and holidays.

Safety Tips for Dangers to kids INSIDE Motor Vehicles:

1. Lock vehicles at all times, even in the garage or driveway.

2. Store keys out of children's reach.

3. Be sure your child is never forgotten in your vehicle, put your cell phone, handbag or briefcase on the floor in the back seat. This gives you another opportunity to be sure that your child is not forgotten.

4. Use drive-thru services when available.

5. Use your debit or credit card to pay for gas at the pump, rather than going in to the gas station to pay.

6. If a child is locked inside a car, get him/her out as quickly as possible. If the child seems hot or sick, call 911 immediately.

7. Lock the power windows so that children cannot get caught in them. Power windows can strangle a child or cut off a finger.

8. It is dangerous to leave children alone in a vehicle, even for a minute. Children can suffer from heat stroke, knock a vehicle into motion, be strangled by a power window, or be abducted.

9. Check vehicles and car trunks right away if a child is missing.

10. Playing in cars can be deadly, each year hundreds of children are injured or even killed as a result of setting a vehicle into motion, do not let your children play in cars or have access to your keys.

"Every week in the U.S., at least 50 children are backed over in driveways and parking lots. Every week at least 2 of these children die. Children are also injured or killed becuase they cannot see in front of larger and taller vehicles. Little ones who dart outside to say goodbye often go unseen by a driver when the vehicle is set into motion. Many times the driver of the vehicle is a parent, relative, or neighbor."

Charlie and I had the chance to hearJanette Fennell's amazing story and learn how she created www.kidsandcars.org. As parents, we immediately connected with her story and share in her desire to keep kids safe in and around cars, and we are looking forward to becoming more involved with KidsandCars.org.

For more information or a free consultation on your legal issue contact Scott and Fenderson PLLC, your injury law and family law attorneys, at 727-321-0099. http://www.scottandfenderson.com

May 14, 2011

1. Do not sign the back of your credit cards. Instead, put 'PHOTO ID REQUIRED.'

2. When you are writing checks to pay on your credit card accounts, DO NOT put the complete account number on the 'For' line. Instead, just put the last four numbers. The credit card company knows the rest of the number, and anyone who might be handling your check as it passes through all the check processing channels won't have access to it.

3. Put your work phone # on your checks instead of your home phone. If you have a PO Box use that instead of your home address. If you do not have a PO Box, use your work address. Never have your SS# printed on your checks. For that matter, you should not provide your social security number to anyone unless absolutely necessary.

4. Place the contents of your wallet on a photocopy machine. Do both sides of each license, credit card, etc. You will know what you had in your wallet and all of the account numbers and phone numbers to call and cancel. Keep the photocopy in a safe place. In the alternative, use your iphone or other camera phone to take pictures of your wallet contents, but be sure you keep your phone locked and use the password function. Do the same thing with your passport, keep a photo copy and a picture of it on your camera phone.

5. Avoid using a debit card altogether, and do not use ATM machines to obtain cash. When you receive your paycheck each week, deposit it in your bank and get enough cash back to cover your purchases during the week. Make your purchases with cash, or use your credit card, but be careful where you use your credit card. Typically if the store or gas station looks questionable, dont use your credit card or ATM card there

6. We have been told we should cancel our credit cards immediately. But the key is having the toll free numbers and your card numbers handy so you know whom to call. Keep those where you can find them.

7. File a police report immediately in the jurisdiction where your credit cards, etc., were stolen. This proves to credit providers you were diligent, and this is a first step toward an investigation (if there ever is one).

8. Call the 3 national credit reporting organizations immediately to place a fraud alert on your name and also call the Social Security fraud line number.

9. Now, here are the numbers you always need to contact about your wallet, if it has been stolen:

1.) Equifax: 1-800-525-6285

2.) Experian (formerly TRW): 1-888-397-3742

3.) Trans Union: 1-800-680 7289

4.) Social Security Administration (fraud line): 1-800-269-0271

For more information or a free consultation on your legal issue contact Scott and Fenderson PLLC, your injury law and family law attorneys, at 727-321-0099. http://www.scottandfenderson.com

March 23, 2010

If you have been in an auto accident and have made a claim, chances are pretty good that the insurance companies and their investigators, claims adjusters, and lawyers have been looking at your profiles on Facebook, Twitter, and/or My Space; and really anywhere else you've been online.

Questions about a person's online persona have become standard during examinations under oath (EUO), depositions and other phases of the discovery process. Not only do they ask about whether you are online, but whether you use a fake name and whether there are any photos of you online.

While my focus is personal injury (auto accidents and slip/trip and fall cases), other areas of law are subject to this kind of investigation as well: family law, criminal law, employment law, and probably every other area of law you can think up.

What you are posting can be used against you, here's how: A personal injury victim puts pictures of themselves up (doing anything) after an accident; the defense will argue that this proves the person wasn't injured; a DUI offender has photos of his/herself at a party or bar; a family law litigant has a photo of him/herself with the "other" woman/man. But it can be more subtle. Posts or photos that you never imagined could/would be used against you will be.

Making your account "private" or using a false name doens't help because that information can be discovered, courts are allowing this type of online information into evidence if it is relevant to the case. And how can you know if its relevant? The other side has to take a peek to see if they think it is.

So should you never be on these sites? Hmmmm, I would say that if you weren't on them then they couldn't be used against you. But with that said, I have a Facebook and Twitter accounts, and I happen to enjoy them. I use this test whenever I post anything: If I would be comfortable having a judge, jury, my mother, my husband's mother, my kids, my friends and neighbors, etc. seeing the post/picture? Would I be comfortable having the post/picture appear in the newspaper? Those are good questions to ask yourself before you post anything on line.

Finally, as we advise with anything: Tell the truth when you are online. But that doesn't mean tell the whole world about every aspect of your life online. Never post online about any pending claims, lawsuits or settlements; these are not topics for your facebook or twitter status updates!

March 22, 2010

1. Watch out for open "S" hooks, protruding bolt ends or screws, loose nuts, or broken, sharp, or rusty parts.

2. Inspect the surface below the playground equipment, is there a safe material like a safety mat or shredded rubber, woodchips, or sand? How deep is the materal, if it is shredded rubber, woodchips or sand, this should be at least 9 inches deep.

3. Is the playground equipement a safe distance (at least six feet) from walls, fences, trees or other stationary objects and dangers.

4. In summer months, check the temperature of the equipment, make sure that metal slides are cool enough.

5. Is the area safe? Are there strangers around? Parents should supervise children at all times, even when children go to the bathroom.